The results immediately before and after could have still been interesting data. I doubt the baby wasn't already stressed at being strapped into the MRI machine, so any changes that came after would be clues to how developing brains specifically react to more extreme emotional/physical trauma.
But yeah they should have no basis to say anything so specific happened on the basis of one case without even a single control to compare "baselines" with.
We have results for that, I remember discussing it back in my psych undergrad over a decade ago. The physical pain is so severe that it creates a notable brain change similar to that of PTSD (if not literally just PTSD) that doesn't get wiped even with infantile amnesia. It was theorized that the restraints, the vision of your mother not helping, and the pain creates a very formative memory.
The fact that it was openly addressed and talked about in a classroom of 98% women not generations ago means its also not entirely a "groundbreaking study they don't want you to hear" as it can clearly get through in other places.
I know this is a real "dude trust me" source, but it was a very long time ago and I recall little specifics beyond the topic.
The circumcision thing is at the point where everybody clearly knows its wrong and barbaric, but nobody wants to be the one to acknowledge it because it would make everyone in America look like monsters and crumble a billion dollar industry from lack of foreskins. So they just pretend not to notice.
There's no date on that article but that website appears to have archives going back as far as 1996, reading between the lines I'm assuming this is a very old anecdote at this point.
So yeah it's old news now, but if this was 1996 it may well have been the first before/during/after MRI data of the procedure and warranted publishing on that merit alone.
[Edit - quick Google Fu and there's another copy of this exact retrospective out there dated 2009. So it was at least before then.]
The results immediately before and after could have still been interesting data. I doubt the baby wasn't already stressed at being strapped into the MRI machine, so any changes that came after would be clues to how developing brains specifically react to more extreme emotional/physical trauma.
But yeah they should have no basis to say anything so specific happened on the basis of one case without even a single control to compare "baselines" with.
We have results for that, I remember discussing it back in my psych undergrad over a decade ago. The physical pain is so severe that it creates a notable brain change similar to that of PTSD (if not literally just PTSD) that doesn't get wiped even with infantile amnesia. It was theorized that the restraints, the vision of your mother not helping, and the pain creates a very formative memory.
The fact that it was openly addressed and talked about in a classroom of 98% women not generations ago means its also not entirely a "groundbreaking study they don't want you to hear" as it can clearly get through in other places.
I know this is a real "dude trust me" source, but it was a very long time ago and I recall little specifics beyond the topic.
The circumcision thing is at the point where everybody clearly knows its wrong and barbaric, but nobody wants to be the one to acknowledge it because it would make everyone in America look like monsters and crumble a billion dollar industry from lack of foreskins. So they just pretend not to notice.
There's no date on that article but that website appears to have archives going back as far as 1996, reading between the lines I'm assuming this is a very old anecdote at this point.
So yeah it's old news now, but if this was 1996 it may well have been the first before/during/after MRI data of the procedure and warranted publishing on that merit alone.
[Edit - quick Google Fu and there's another copy of this exact retrospective out there dated 2009. So it was at least before then.]
[Ed #2, some pro circumcision article trying to defame the guy says it was allegedly carried out in 1998]